Entertain this for a Moment: Teixeira-Holiday Three-Way

by gondeee on Jul 16, 2008 3:00 PM EDT in Trade News

Firstly, get your mind out of the gutter. Secondly, think about the Braves and their never give in approach and their play for one year approach. The price for Matt Holliday of the Rockies is likely a pretty steep one. He’ll be around for next year (like Tex was last year) and he’s got good enough power and hitting numbers away from Coors for other teams not be scared off from dealing top prospects for him. The scenario I’m about to unravel is highly unlikely, but it occurred to me, I have a blog, so I put it out there for all to comment on.

First of all the assumption is that there truly is a team that has a need for Mark Teixeira, something the blogosphere’s trade rumor clearinghouse (MLBTR) doesn’t think there is. Take for instance the Angels, who would love more power, but don’t want to supplant Kotchman at first for the future, don’t need another outfielder, and aren’t usually a team that trade away a ton of prospects. In that instance this Teixeira-Holliday three-way might match up pretty good.

Here’s the magical mythical deal:
Angels – get Mark Teixeira; give up one A+ prospect and one B prospect
Braves – get Matt Holliday; give up Teixeira and one A- prospect
Rockies – get two A prospects and a B prospect; give up Matt Holliday

Crazy, wild, far-fetched, I know. Sometimes trades are all about how teams match-up, not about what a team has to offer or what a team has to give up. The Angles usually do not like to give up the haul of prospects needed to get one of the two best hitters available, but with the Braves kicking in an extra prospect to the Rockies the deal might seem palatable for the other two teams involved. The Rockies would also have a better selection of prospects to choose from. Of course, would the trade be palatable for the Braves?

In this scenario we’re giving up Teixeira and the chance to get perhaps two prospects from the Angels or two draft picks should we not resign Teixeira. But we’re already revamping our team for next year with the hottest bat on the trade market. We are, of course, giving up a second top-prospect, but remember that’s what prospects are for, and traditionally that’s how the Braves have treated their prospects – as fodder for trades. This move actually allows us to keep more prospects than we would have normally had to give up for the likes of a Matt Holliday. We presumably would still get two draft picks for Holliday, when his agent, Scott Boras, takes him to free agency after 2009, so all we’ve really given up is one prospect and we’ve added a premier hitter for a run at the postseason next year.

Anyway, this is just a pure hypothetical, but in the era of creative trading and trying to find ways to match up Teixeira with a willing recipient, things like this could begin to circulate.

0 recs | Comment 12 comments

Read Related

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

i’ve pretty much done my best to shoot down every trade rumor that has come unto the blog, because i don’t think they make sense for the Braves or the other team. However this trade actually makes a ton of sense, though it probably won’t happen (because it actually makes sense). But it fixes the difficulty that every Tex trade has with it, the Braves want top talent back, and the team getting him doesn’t want to mortgage their future. The Angels are still paying a high price but i think they’d be willing to do it, maybe.

Well thought out and if that actually happens it would be absolutely awesome. Although, with Holliday’s splits I’m not sold on his ability to hit outside of Coors Field, even though he went deep in the all important ASG.

"We win today, that's two in a row... if we win tomorrow, that's called a winning streak. It has happened before..."

by Swo12bv on Jul 16, 2008 3:21 PM EDT 0 recs

Holliday might not be as good on the road, and I’m sure there’s some Coors effect in his numbers, but he’s still hitting over .300 away from Coors. That’s better than anyone else in our outfield.

by skipcaray on Jul 16, 2008 5:32 PM EDT up 0 recs

Alright, let’s say for the sake of argument it happens. What do the Braves do at first base? Since Holliday would be replacing Blanco/Diaz in left, where do the Braves get Blanco/Diaz production from first base? What do they do with Blanco and Diaz?

Now for the reasons why it won’t happen.

1. Holliday makes more money in his 5th year of arbitration than Teixeira does in his 6th. Meaning, Holliday is going to get a bigger payday than Teixeira when he hits free agency. Chances of resigning Holliday is slimmer than resigning Teixeira.

2. The Braves would then be giving up six top prospects for 2.5 years of Teixeira and Holliday. That’s 36 years of team controlled top prospects compared to 2.5 years of Teixeira and Holliday.

3. Holliday has more drastic home/road splits than Teixeira did at the time of the trade. The chance of Holliday not being as good as he is at Coors is great.

4. Why would the Rockies accept 2 top prospects and one middle prospect for Holliday when the Rangers got 5 prospects for Teixeira?

5. Where would the Angels play Teixeira and Kotchman? The Angels have a crowded outfield and DH.

6. The Angels will only give up one top prospect and one middle prospect for Teixeira? When we paid several top prospects and several middle prospects? So then, why the Angels? Wouldn’t most teams in the MLB be going after that trade? What piece of the puzzle does the Angels hold that lets them only trade one top prospect and one middle prospect?

7. Are the Rockies conceding the year? Sure, they’re 8.5 out. That’s just 2 more games than the Braves are, and they play in an extremely weak division where everyone is under .500. But I think if any team is hesitant to trade off the year because a huge run at the playoffs would be unlikely, it would Colorado who went on a miracle run last year. What message would Colorado be sending? That their one good year was a fluke and they should have had a fire-sell last year too?

8. Why would the Angels be willing to mortage the future when they’re sitting very pretty atop another crappy division? They’re already highly favored to win the division.

9. The Braves and Angels just accept all the extra payroll while Colorado removes a huge contract?

10. Is Holliday that much more significant offensively than Teixeira that we’d have to give up a top prospect as well?

by beeniez on Jul 16, 2008 3:43 PM EDT 0 recs

1. Holliday is making less money this year and he’s signed for 2009 at $13.5M.
2. Again, we’ve never been afraid to trade prospects for one or two years of a top player.
3. Holliday is still a dangerous hitter and has an .860 OPS the last two years on the road - that’s what Tex is putting up this year overall.
4. I think you answer this in your number 9. In the past, salary has counted for prospects as far as the Rox are concerned.
5. That’s all part of the hypothetical, man. Substitute another team instead of the Angels.
6. I guess part of this assumption is that the Angels and Braves both have prospects that the Rockies desire - that goes a long way in making a trade. A lot of other teams could be very stingy with their prospects, leaving this door opened.
7. Again, part of the hypothetical.
8. They’ve won the division three of the last four years… this trade helps them get back to the World Series.
9. Yep.
10. One more prospect (who may or may not pan out - Andy Marte anyone) for a top-10 offensive producer - hells yeah.

by gondeee on Jul 16, 2008 4:25 PM EDT up 0 recs

2. You’re trading the potential of future upside of established win now (or next year) potential. I don’t think the Braves need to be buyers at all unless we’re trading young players for young players.

3. That’s the big reason why I wouldn’t want to trade for Holiday. .850 OPS on the road isn’t bad at all, but not elite.

4. Everyone keeps forgetting that the Braves got Mahay too. He gave us a sandwich pick too when he left. But, yeah, Holiday alone should be worth at least as much as Tex last year. So 3-4 prospects sounds about right depending on the quality.

6. Because we paid for 1.5 years of Tex, not just .5. But yeah, I agree that doesn’t sound like enough. One more low/middle prospect? Guess it depends on the A+ prospect

7. They are really to sell Holiday. You don’t have to have a fire sale but I’d say 90% chance that Holiday is gone. Also depends on if the Pirates are selling Bay/Nady and for what price.

8. Because they’ve been lucky and they have an anemic offense.

10. No, but Holiday is around for 1.5 years while Teix is bolting at the end of this year.

Anyway I don’t want to see the Braves buying Holiday. If we can’t find young prospects for Tex then just take the picks.

by VictorW on Jul 16, 2008 7:56 PM EDT up 0 recs

Home (1230 ABs): 257 R, 448 H, 96 2B, 16 3B, 78 HR, 285 RBI, 113 BB, 209 K, .364/.427/.659 = 1.086 OPS

Road (1196 ABs): 167 R, 331 H, 75 2B, 7 3B, 39 HR, 161 RBI, 106 BB, 251 K, .277/.341/.449 = .790 OPS

I’m pretty sure that a .790 OPS is close to average, if not slightly below, for most LFers in the league. There’s a significant drop in every single slash stat, not to mention a bizarre increase in strikeouts in less ABs. Depending on the prospect, I’m not really sure if the deal would be worth it. We’d most likely be getting two draft picks for either Tex or Holliday, but does the year’s production of Holliday equal whoever the prospect is? Tough call.

BTW…the sample size is way too small, but take a look at Holliday’s production at The Ted:

The Ted: (109 ABs): 21 R, 37 H, 9 2B, 2 3B, 7 HR, 25 RBI, 7 BB, 24 K, .339/.379/.651 = 1.031 OPS

I guess I should be one to talk.
There's nights that I can't even walk.
There's days I couldn't give a fuck.
And in between is where I'm stuck.

by Smoltz's Beard on Jul 16, 2008 3:44 PM EDT 0 recs

Also, I meant to say that the first line of the OP had me cracking up.

I guess I should be one to talk.
There's nights that I can't even walk.
There's days I couldn't give a fuck.
And in between is where I'm stuck.

by Smoltz's Beard on Jul 16, 2008 3:47 PM EDT up 0 recs

If the Angels wanted to make a move for a bat they would just go after Holiday. Kotchman is a far better player than Anderson or Matthews so Holiday becomes the LF and they keep Kotchman.

by dwbrave on Jul 16, 2008 4:01 PM EDT 0 recs

I don’t think they’ll trade for Holiday because he’s expensive and they’ve already invested so much money into their crappy, old, overpaid outfield.

by VictorW on Jul 16, 2008 7:57 PM EDT up 0 recs